Foot Locker CC Nationals Discussion Thread

sc42 wrote:

"We are watching a phenomenal performance" says the announcer, while we watch 6 kids milling around at a road crossing and a mom in a flannel drink coffee. Oh the irony. But I guess we should reserve judgment. They've only had a few decades to work out the bugs.

Well, it is an annual event. Maybe they didn't have enough time in advance to prepare.

Reuben Reina ran 14:36 at Balboa in 1985. Eight of 31 runners in that race ran 14:54 or faster and the 9th finisher ran 14:56 (same rounded time as Andrew Hunter from today).

Nearly half the 1985 field ran faster than Phillip Rocha.

How can anybody believe that many runners in 1985 were truly faster than Hunter or Rocha. The course was probably faster in 1985 if it was the same exact course which seems doubtful.

sc42 wrote:

"We are watching a phenomenal performance" says the announcer, while we watch 6 kids milling around at a road crossing and a mom in a flannel drink coffee. Oh the irony. But I guess we should reserve judgment. They've only had a few decades to work out the bugs.

Haha, I noticed that during the broadcast and thought it was pretty funny too.

Ah yes, let's just revise history to make our opinion the truth. SMH.

Times at Balboa wrote:

Reuben Reina ran 14:36 at Balboa in 1985. Eight of 31 runners in that race ran 14:54 or faster and the 9th finisher ran 14:56 (same rounded time as Andrew Hunter from today).

Nearly half the 1985 field ran faster than Phillip Rocha.

How can anybody believe that many runners in 1985 were truly faster than Hunter or Rocha. The course was probably faster in 1985 if it was the same exact course which seems doubtful.

Sounds like the web stream sucked, I should have broadcast it on Periscope.

Hunter had a decent lead at the 1 mile mark when they started up the hill, when they came back down it seemed like he had doubled it. Rocha looked like he was just running his own race and holding off the runner in 3rd. I was impressed that Hunter was able to keep pushing himself with the size of the lead he had.

xcrunner3456 wrote:

Pretty sure Tinman took over his coaching this year

and kept slowing down.

Nice race, Rocha!!!!!!!!!

Kinney alum wrote:

1985 went out a little slower (4:38-4:40) when Reina set his record.

I figured the record was lost at that point, i.e. at 4:31.

The dude just won by 12 seconds, doing a classic Prefontaine move on a tough course. Furthermore, while his aerobic ability has been well-trained, he's still extremely trainable. All Tinman would do to Hunter other than make him a great runner (which he has done) is to hold him back from really blossoming at the high school level. Which is ultimately a good thing. As it is, Hunter obliterated a decent field. Track will be fun.

Times at Balboa wrote:

Reuben Reina ran 14:36 at Balboa in 1985. Eight of 31 runners in that race ran 14:54 or faster and the 9th finisher ran 14:56 (same rounded time as Andrew Hunter from today).

Nearly half the 1985 field ran faster than Phillip Rocha.

How can anybody believe that many runners in 1985 were truly faster than Hunter or Rocha. The course was probably faster in 1985 if it was the same exact course which seems doubtful.

I am covering NXN and FL CCC to do an ARA blog column on the two Nat'l H.S. X-C Champs. As the announcers kept referring to Reina's CR... I went back to look at the results from that day and thought the same thing! I also saw that the Top 8 finishers back in '85 all ran faster than Drew Hunter today....and I was puzzled by that. Had a hard time reconciling some of the track times that were turned in last spring by some of these participants against the times posted by many of those 8 who ran faster than Hunter did today but not on the track back in '86....

First, I agree, is the course absolutely the same? Some one should know that. That needs to be checked out and verified. I have never been there to see for myself.

Second, Reina & Co never had all these post-state meet Nat'l T & F Invites and Nat'l Champs like the runners of today have.... some of them with pace makers and on really good tracks at night under the lights. All ideal conditions for faster times. Reina & Co. didn't have that in June '86... and maybe they didn't race as aggressively on the track back then as what is now practiced. After all, we did go thru a "slump" in H.S. distance performance for almost 15 years after 1985.

Third, I believe that Hunter did slow down a bit from 1.5-2.5 (even though we couldn't see it on camera) even though his lead seemed to grow. I think that cost him sub-14:50. For a guy who ran with a big lead all season.... I did not see him really "grinding it out" in the last half of the race for whatever reason. That puzzled me if he wanted to leave a true legacy performance in his final H.S. X-C career race. He just didn't look like a guy who ran 8:42 for 2-miles last year as a junior in H.S. His pace was fast but not that fast. I am not being critical.... just puzzled. A national champion is still a national champion, and kudos to him!

Finally, I have worked on a number of broadcasts... and I doubt if the camera on the lead truck was broken... it was the microwave relay transmission to get the signal back from the lead camera to the production truck that appeared to be not working. A good broadcast crew has a backup ready because that is a common problem. Not sure why they couldn't fix it... altho the race was only 15-20 minutes long but problem surfaced at end of the girls race.. so they had over an hour to address it. Very frustrating for us and I'm sure Foot Locker, too, for what they spent!

Vendetta guy wrote:

The dude just won by 12 seconds, doing a classic Prefontaine move on a tough course. Furthermore, while his aerobic ability has been well-trained, he's still extremely trainable. All Tinman would do to Hunter other than make him a great runner (which he has done) is to hold him back from really blossoming at the high school level. Which is ultimately a good thing. As it is, Hunter obliterated a decent field. Track will be fun.

Guess who this is.

You think I'm Tinman? That's hilarious. I'm similar to Tinman in that I run. That's it. But thanks for that, you brightened up my day.

What a terrible race, had hunter controlled himself he could have run in the 14:40s but instead he went out way to fast for his abilities. still just a kid so he has some time to become a smart racer

A neutral fan here- actually not an Oregon fan- and I have to say that is ridiculous. He ran to win- not to meet your expectation. He won- it was never in doubt. Good for Hunter.

keepingitrels wrote:

What a terrible race, had hunter controlled himself he could have run in the 14:40s but instead he went out way to fast for his abilities. still just a kid so he has some time to become a smart racer

track season should be fun with the best in the nation willing to go after it solo if necessary.

I need a raise

keepingitrels wrote:

What a terrible race, had hunter controlled himself he could have run in the 14:40s but instead he went out way to fast for his abilities. still just a kid so he has some time to become a smart racer

Perhaps you noticed that Hunter did not go out by himself. That's how cross country races often go.

When we could actually see Hunter, it was clear that his turnover was not where it needed to be after the 1 mile mark. I think his running real fast times on very easy courses during the season hurt him today. Those two big hills can really destroy your legs. I don't think anyone expected a 4:55 2nd mile.

I agree that over the past 15 years the rise of the post season track meets somewhat skews historical cross country-to-track comparisons like this. Let's take Goucher (14:41) and Solinsky (14:40) for instance. They both won by larger margins than Hunter today. Goucher's best 1600m/3200m from high school were 4:18 and 8:55. I'm pretty sure those were just times from Colorado meets, as there really weren't the prominent national meets back in 1994 (even if these were his junior year times, they certainly don't indicate the same level as his cross country prowess…especially his runner-up finish at NCAAs as a true freshman the next fall). Solinsky on the other hand, made the trip to Arcadia for the 2 mile, where he went 8:43. Could Goucher have run 10 seconds faster at sea level at a national meet? Most would probably say yes.

That 85 race was pretty loaded though. Off the top of my head, here's some notable track performances of the runners in that 1985 Footlocker race (nearly all of these performances were run at state meets or during the season, not at post-season national meets):

1st, 14:36) Reina ran 3:46.5 for 1500m in 86.

2nd, 14:41 and 9th 14:56) The Mastalir brothers were 4:04/8:45 guys in 86.

8th, 14:54) Davis won in 14:38 at FLN in 86 . Broke his foot during his senior track season.

11th, 15:03) Eric Henry ran 8:52 3200m in 86.

15th, 15:09) John Trautman ran 8:05 3K (8:44 2 mile) in 86.

keepingitrels wrote:

What a terrible race, had hunter controlled himself he could have run in the 14:40s but instead he went out way to fast for his abilities. still just a kid so he has some time to become a smart racer

Exactly my sentiments, what a terrible race for him. He could hardly have run it any worse, but fortunately hung on due solely to being much better than the others. If that had been me, I'd have been sorely disappointed, and would vow to do much better the next time.